The MGoBlog CYA Guide

Hello, friends. We all have websites--we're Americans, after all, and therefore everything we've ever thought or said is worthy of worldwide publicity. But sometimes websites are started by people of below average intelligence, a group that comprises an axiomatically-surprising 90% of the population. If you have a website you're probably in this group, and you're probably a narcissist. This is fine if you cover things like how gross dogs are (OMG SOOOO GROSS!), but if you've entered a field where actual events can sometimes impinge on your gloriously intelligent correctitude, you're going to need a guide to covering your ass when you, being significantly less intelligent than the public at large, screw up in a fashion unbefitting a self-proclaimed "pundit" or "super genius" or "verbal internet hero".

This is regrettably necessary, since not doing so clearly marks you as insane instead of just lamentably misinformed about your place in the world. So do it in about two sentences at the start of your meandering post. It hurts, I know, but you'll spend the next 3,000 words reaffirming your status as Super Blog Genius.

Step 2: Gloss Over The Details Of Your Error.

Sure, you might have spent months yammering on about how your pet theory implies that the field of your choice is going to undergo a "revolution" or "competitive colonoscopy" because of the deep, dark, foul secrets you have uncovered like the super genius you are. You may have set aside entire sections of your website to revel in the glories of a select set of entities that embody the theory you espouse.

But that's not really all that important... when you took five seconds to blather about some other topic that, like a monkey picking stocks, you managed to get correct! Why, it doesn't matter that all your time and (relative) mental energy was poured into this other, stunningly wrong thing, when you vaguely suggested that something else could possibly occur. Maybe.

Step 3: Use blindingly obvious statements condescendingly.

Remember that a good substitute for actually being smart is accusing everyone else of being dumb. People will mentally filter themselves out from such an accusation to protect their egos and, since you're basically correct that everyone else is dumb, people will agree with you. By taking blindly obvious things and phrasing them as if they are revelations of stunning magnitude, you will invite the reader to join you in the Club of Obvious Genius:

If you watched any games at all this weekend, there were plenty of examples of scheme and style of play.

Indeed! What an astute point, that if you watched "any games at all" this weekend you would have seen examples of "scheme"! Also! Also there would have been "styles of play." A valuable lesson has been learned: football teams attempt to do things in an organized fashion. All hail the master tactician! This amazing point is followed up:

The talk of scheme and style of play will continue here. Too many other games and teams give great evidence to its existence and power, and will certainly be elaborated upon further on here and HP.

Indeed. The two giants of blogging have decided to discuss what football teams do. Alas, if only I could understand the basic concepts of football!

Step 4: Confuse People With Utter Nonsense.

If you attempt to make sense, you'll probably fail, again because of the intelligence thing. Instead, confuse your reader by making completely ridiculous sentences that make them question their own sanity, their own ability to parse sentences into meaningful concepts:

Echoing HP's discussion in his Mea Culpa, Boise State was so far behind from the first whistle in this game, they really never had a chance to implement their scheme, some of the scripted plays, and the overall technical advantage they possess. ... Their magnificent offense was scrapped in order to play catch-up. Obviously Boise doesn't do catch-up all that well.

A wide-open spread offense designed to score in bunches and quickly... bad at catch up? Has the whole world gone insane? Or maybe... it's me!

Step 5: Point out things that entirely disprove your point and claim them as your own. CFR is the master:

To cite just one example, Wisconsin's perfected rushing attack was too much for a great Bowling Green offensive attack. But Bowling Green also did things to Wisconsin's defense, headed by an elite defensive coordinator, that has never been achieved by Big Ten opponents. Using vastly inferior talent. That's kind of the point. These low talent teams are, at times, able to play on the same stage as super talented teams. Its not luck, but design.

Of course the entire argument proposed here was that superawesome spread offenses that combine the run and the pass had created a elite group of six teams that were basically invincible to anyone outside of the group, so the Neanderthal pounding that Wisconsin executed (10 passes all day) should have completely failed to beat the BG spread awesomeness.

Note a further excellent use of Step 4 here, the claim that the Bowling Green offense, sporting stone-cold first-round lock Omar Jacobs and a splendid array of skill position players has "vastly inferior talent" to a Wisconsin defense that's lost seven starters and has no obvious NFL players on it, let alone first round locks.

Step 6: Remind everyone that you didn't ascend to this throne of blogging genius by mistake.

Not everyone can blog, after all. It's a hardy elite that can register a domain name, set up a default installation of WordPress, and claim their "dynamic new look" totally kicks ass. The thing costs literally dollars a month, and where are you going to get dollars? The barn raising? The harvest dance?

You can rightly criticize me for missing the boat with Boise State, but to dismiss that this stuff even exists or is not incredibly powerful, means you're completely missing the boat when it comes to football.

Ai! Alone, alone, all alone on a pier with a boat that left 45 minutes ago, staring into the moody sea, contemplating the best way to commit suicide, I am. I am I am.

Step 7: Insult People Who Were Really, Really Right

A false air of bravado lends your posts an air of legitimacy. After all, who wants to read the writings of someone "reasonable"? Nobody. Reason is for pussies. Anyone who is correct and is therefore reasonable is therefore a pussy and should be insulted:

The Georgia pimps will say it was all Georgia's defense, but I can assure you most savvy fans were shocked at some of the gross incompetence on display by Jared Zabransky

Lordy, no, I must not be savvy because I expected Jared Zabransky to suck. In this fashion you can frame the events that have taken place as totally unexpected and shocking to the knowledgeable fan and leave the pathetic concept of having a vague idea of what's going on to the plebians.